User talk:MrOllie

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Vielen Dank!

Projects using OSGi

Thank you for your review on my changes. I understand the fact that having broken links/pages is not great but it is not the only existing entry that has that problem (see Joram). Even so, in my edit there was another entry (Jahia) that does exist, could we just restore that one ? I can take care of it if you agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhillou (talk • contribs) 15:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Jahia's article is about the company and not the platform. It is also terribly sourced and should probably be deleted. MrOllie (talk) 15:57, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Connection between the topics of Infodemic, Infodemiology, and Misinformation with Cognitive Immunology

I appreciate your concern for the edits I made on the infodemic, infodemiology, and misinformation pages, however, I don't think your reversions of my edits are in the best interest of these pages. I’d like to work with you to enhance Wikipedia to recognize the new science of Cognitive Immunology. Could you please further explain the why you reverted the edits I made to these pages?

First, there are a few specific points I'd like to address though.

- My addition of inoculation theory on misinformation seems quite valid considering the already existing mention of inoculating minds (i.e. "Another approach is to "inoculate" against it by delivering weakened misinformation that warns of the dangers of the misinformation.") Similarly, the addition of the sentence about Cognitive Immunology seemed quite warranted as the topic related directly to prevention of the spread of misinformation and I included a reputable source (the foundation book) on the topic.

- You marked my addition of information about Cognitive Immunology to infodemic as a neologism, which seems pretty ironic given that "infodemic" is itself a neologism. There's nothing inherently wrong about neologisms, especially when they are used to refer to something that is truly a new development, which is true in the case of infodemic and Cognitive Immunology and is supported by the sources I included about Cognitive Immunology.

- Finally, in the case of my edits on infodemiology, I improved the introductory sentence on the topic by providing a more accurate definition of the field as described by the academic who coined the term. And, again, my addition of the mention of cognitive immunology seems quite reasonable given the obvious relation between these two fields.

I'm new to contributing to Wikipedia but I did my best to read up on the rules of the platform and I thought my edits to these pages were all quite fair and I'm not convinced your complete reversion of each of them was fair and would appreciate further explanations. Meletao (talk) 23:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I reverted your edits because they seemed more about promoting a neologism than about improving the encyclopedia. You're right that there is nothing inherently wrong with new terminology, but Wikipedia is not a place to get 'ahead of the curve' and attempt to force usage of a new term, nor is Wikipedia a place to systematically promote a particular person's work. Can you explain how you are associated to Andy Norman and/or Cognitive Immunology? WP:COI may be relevant. MrOllie (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

You have a good point. I'm new to this and hadn't checked out this COI page yet. By Wikipedia's standards I do technically have a conflict of interest – although I see it more as a confluence of interest – because I work for the Cognitive Immunology Research Collaborative (CIRCE), which is the research institute founded and led by Andy Norman. I didn't know this was something I'd have to declare when making edits related to the topic. Now that I'm better informed, it's occurred to me that it'd be in everyone's best interest for someone like you who's not associated with CIRCE or Norman but is experienced with Wikipedia to help with the draft page for cognitive immunology. Would this interest you? Do you think a case can be made for creating this page? Meletao (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Looks like a rebranding of Inoculation theory to me, I do not believe we need a second page on it. MrOllie (talk) 18:32, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Cognitive Immunology is recognized as distinct by some of the most notable inoculation theorists. Sander van der Linden, Stephan Lewandowsky, John Cook, Jon Roozenbeek, and Josh Compton—have all signed a declaration that:

- Announces cognitive immunology’s arrival to the academic scene

- Asserts that cognitive immunology is a discipline in its own right, with boundaries quite different from inoculation theory’s. (Inoculation theory is a branch of psychology; by contrast, cognitive immunology sits on the borderlands between epistemology, psychology, evolutionary biology, epidemiology, immunology, etc.)

- Clarifies that cognitive immunology goes beyond inoculation theory in the questions that it asks. Indeed, it asks questions that can’t be posed properly in the language of inoculation theory. Questions like “How does the mind’s immune system work?” and “Why do mental immune systems fail?”

Over two dozen scholars have signed the declaration so far, including top experts on disinformation mitigation like Seema Yasmin and Claire Wardle. Also, This View of Life magazine will soon publish a print symposium about cognitive immunology. You can find the declaration and it's signatories here: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1e-5R8XVxHnuUdjgdijRN61eUuOJrQUFR Meletao (talk) 20:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't find science by press release particularly convincing, but at any rate you will not accomplish anything by arguing about this on my user talk page. MrOllie (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Fair, but you're missing the point: if anyone has say about whether or not cognitive immunology is distinct from inoculation theory or not it's the top experts in inoculation theory. I'm just trying to get this information out there the right way. If you have any other advice or more feedback I'd appreciate it. I hope you can keep an open mind about whether or not cognitive immunology deserves its own page. Meletao (talk) 21:16, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Kmart

I saw where you reverted my edit to Kmart, saying that we need to wait for a source. The source is literally in the article. This is the source. GamerKiller2347 (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Read the cited article, not just the headline: "three in the continental U.S. and a handful of stores elsewhere" MrOllie (talk) 01:12, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

OmniVision Technologies is now OMNIVISION

Hi @MrOllie, I see you've got OmniVision Technologies on your radar. The company has going through a reorganization and the current page is no longer accurate, however as I am an employee of its marketing agency, I'm not allowed to make any edits to the page. So I put a request on the OmniVision Technologies "Talk" page, with the required disclosure statement. There are a lot of changes and additions, and I included citations. I realize you may not make all of them. But the main issue is that the company is now OMNIVISION. Someone did up date the logo, but that's all so far. I think a new pages has to be created? Please let me know if this is something you can do, and what changes can be made. I appreciate your input. Thank you! StellaBean (talk) 20:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

You didn't use the {{requestedit}} template, which will add it to the queue for such requests. Do note, though, that per Wikipedia:Article titles it is not necessarily the case that the article should be titled with the company's preferred capitalization. - MrOllie (talk) 14:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for showing me the template! I did some research to figure out how to do this, and never found it. Just the one template disclosing that I'm paid to do this. I will follow the instructions. Regarding the Article name - it's not the capitalization that is most important, but the fact that the name is no longer Omnivision Technologies, but merely Omnivision. I know it's not possible to rename a page, so do I need to request a new page be created with a redirect? Thanks, in advance, for your response. StellaBean (talk) 16:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

It is possible to rename a page, and the reviewing editor will do so if they think your request meets the policies surrounding article titles. MrOllie (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks so much! StellaBean (talk) 16:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

caribbean

The Caribbean is a region of the Americas that consists of the Caribbean Sea, its islands and the surrounding coasts. The region is southeast of the Gulf of Mexico and the North American mainland, east of Central America, and north of South America. Enlightened105747 (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

To make major changes such as that you must get consensus on the talk page of the associated article, not my user talk page. MrOllie (talk) 19:17, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

its not a major change at all, im simply adding information that is true, im not deleting any thing that is true like you Enlightened105747 (talk) 20:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this on the article talk page and get consensus there, my user talk is not the proper place for this. MrOllie (talk) 20:34, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Brostocks as a source

Hey there. Not that I have any problem with the reversion, but if you're going to remove this as an unreliable source from KMart, you'd better also remove it from Sears on the same basis. I think it's been in use there for a while now. All the best, Skybunny (talk) 00:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)